So you think George W. Bush is not a conservative?

SOTU transcript ^ | 1/22/04

[ohioWfan]

Good question.

I get upset because I remember the HORROR of 8 years of xlinton........and the conservatives who helped give them to us.

While I really don't think there are enough of these fringees to make President Bush lose, there are many of them who are ACTIVELY trying to convince others (lurkers who read FR) that Bush is dangerous/socialist/whatever in order to defeat him in November.

Some are doing so with their own list of 'facts' that are often outright false, and THAT is why I spend time debunking their claims.

I believe that President Bush is most likely going to win in a landslide, because when most Americans get in that voting booth, they are going to vote for their safety and future, and it will be for George W. Bush.

BUT, I am going to work as though he is the underdog. It is THAT important to me to KEEP a DEMOCRAT out of the White House.

[Mo1]

Oh! I see you have forgotten the Reign of LBJ.!

Ramsey Clark came out of that admistration didn't he?

[ravingnutter]

Where were you when he put us back into UNESCO, which is a major abortion promoting and One World Government teaching tool for for the UN?

Sigh...how quickly we forget...

CRAWFORD, Tex., Aug. 29 -- President Bush ordered the State Department today to withhold U.S. family planning help from overseas groups that promote or perform abortions with their own money.

The decision expands an order issued two years ago that applied only to family planning money administered by the U.S. Agency for International Development.

U.S. Aid Cut Off to Groups Backing Abortion

Bush Administration Denies UNFPA Funding Again

Bush Halts Funding for International Abortion Counseling (USAID)

Bush Cuts Funding to International Abortion Groups

[GigaDittos]

"The Constitution does not mention paying you doctor bills."

You're not thinking the right way. You have to look at he "promote the General welfare...", and see the doctor's bills as part of the govt. mission. /sarcasm

[Protagoras]

Post the link. The way you cited it, I think that it is a fairy tale.

[Wait4Truth]

One thing we on FR need to realize is that we have been invaded by RATS posing as angry conservatives. Not everybody here, of course, but many. I have also heard that RATS are actually being TRAINED to call conservative talk radio shows to blast Bush and pose as people that voted for Bush in 2000 but will not do so this year. It is important to understand what is happening - and I think you do. The goal is to drag as many away from Bush as possible. The fact that ALL polls show that Bush has overwhelming support among Republicans only makes my point more obvious. We are being HAD by many POSERS that hate Bush, have always hated Bush, never voted for Bush in 2000 and are doing all they can to elect a Democrat. Period.

[woodyinscc]

A portion of that 90% are not enthusiastic enough to take time out of their busy day to vote, and Bush loses.

Wishful thinking?

[exmarine]

A portion of that 90% are not enthusiastic enough to take time out of their busy day to vote, and Bush loses.

If he were wise, Bush would take his cue from the 1996 election. Conservatives stayed home or voted Perot because Dole was quite weak on key conservative issues. Will they learn from history?

[CSM]

"IF all of you who claim superiority to the rest of us will admit that you are choosing to vote FOR the Democrat by throwing your vote away, then so be it. YOU have to live with that choice."

How is nullifying a vote, throwing a vote away? Each person votes, each vote carries 1 vote. Just because one either decides not to vote or to vote an alternative party doesn't make another individual's ballot worth 2 votes.

[George W. Bush]

How curious of you to use the words "Bushbot" mindset about my understanding of the Scriptural mandate for Christians to be responsible citizens.

The scriptural mandate, as you call it, calls for recognizing the legitimate authority of government in collecting taxes and enforcing criminal laws. In short, Christians were not to be scofflaws.

You seem to assume that the Roman empire was a nice little democracy. It wasn't.

Oh, well, people like to imagine all sorts of things if it's convenient to their argument. I suppose it works if you think the Bible is a Ouija board. But a strict Biblical constructionist, like a constitutional constructionist, cannot find these 'mandates' in the documents you claim as your authority.

[PhiKapMom]

You can lose the word "true" for getting a President because it isn't going to happen. A candidate that would appeal to the "true" conservatives wouldn't get elected by the vast majority of the rest of us Republicans.

If you don't understand that fact, then you are going to be unhappy for a very long time.

And while you are at it -- quit referring to President Bush as a Republican in Name Only -- "true" conservatives have no right going around saying who is and who is not a Republican. I resent and so do a lot of others which is one reason your wing of the party and your elitist attitude will not get anyone elected as President. You shove it in our face if we don't believe 100% like the "true" conservatives then we are RINO's. This person is tired of taking that crap from you or anyone else on here. I am a lifelong Republican, conservative, and want to win elections not win moral victories. Moral victories don't get a Republican in the White House and Republicans in Congress -- they elect Democrats!

[Dane]

Besides, Bush is going to pick up far more votes from the center-left than he's going to lose from that tiny minority of wingnuts that you think we are, so what's the problem?

Actually the center and that really grates you self-called wingnuts. You know that you all will never gain political power with your purest agenda and are angry that Bush is being successful.

JMO, but you all show petty jealousy.

[looscnnn]

How do you know? Elect someone to Congress, then get a couple more in, eventually you have a serious contender.

[Capt. Tom]

Nice rant Capt. Tom

Thanks

I voted for Bush in 2000 and will vote for him in 2004

I don't have the luxury of sitting on the sidelines and letting the socialists or Clintonistas get back into power.

As a right wing democrat(not to be confused with the socialists) I would love to see a Zell Miller/ John Breaux ticket.

But the socialists have taken over the democrat party and democrats need not apply for presidential nominations.

So Bush comes the closest to being right wing democrats. Their immigration policies are still to far left for me, but it's the best candidate I can get.

Sovereignty shouldn't be for sale. Hopefully the right wingers in both parties can kill Bush's plan. - Tom

[Howlin]

I am voting for the Constitution Party.

Am I in Bizarro World? Don't WE get bashed for "voting for the party" but now it's okay to "vote for the party as long as it's the Constitution Party?"

[MEG33]

I know what you you wish for.You can't get that so it is either Bush or a Democrat that will win the election.If you wish to register a "protest "vote,fine.

[CSM]

ooooops....

Not, "throwing a vote away". Meant to say "vote for democratic candidate."

[skip2myloo]

"....a few proposals..." - you make that sound so innocuous.

Campaign Finance Reform, the Patriot Act and a seal of approval for who knows how many illegal aliens (8-13 Millions, maybe more), costing taxpayers Billions (that's with a VERY BIG B) of dollars are harding innocuous proposals.

[exmarine]

This debate really comes down to one question: Does moral principle take precedence over loyalty to a man or a party? I say it does! Many Bush supports believe in party over principle.

[Howlin]

Bush is going to pick up far more votes from the center-left than he's going to lose from that tiny minority of wingnuts that you think we are, so what's the problem?

You're exactly right, which seems to bother the hell out of a lot of people around here.

And "the problem" is that we're wasting a lot of time trying to get you all to stop bashing Bush and START bashing the Democrats.